DMQ level 1 and 2 changes

[CarlW]

I enjoyed the whole 'building the portfolio' experience of DSC2. It was a thoroughly enriching process.

Now it is a driving test. That makes me sad for those that come after us.

 

[Klenchblaize]

I agree with much of what WR has set out above.

I’ve always felt the focus of L2 should be that of in-the-field carcass handling rather than if the Candidate gets his/her reading of the wind 100% correct. As in no harm is done if a stalker fails to put a deer in the larder because their tracking skills aren’t of a Ray Mears or Klenchblaize ( ) standard but failing to observe TB or worse in a downed beast is another matter.

This and all other meat hygiene considerations may be demonstrated on any make of deer and irrespective of if it was taken on the Hill or within a Sussex park.

K

 

[Alantoo]

@Stalker1962 and @terrier1 ... do you recall if there was anything unique from your subsequent two stalks that could not have been ascertained by an assessor’s questions?

And I suppose the full corollary is...what unique experiences and circumstances have you had in your lifetime of stalking which were not witnessed or ascertained in your 3 witnessed stalks. And do they then make the original 3x scheme any less valid?

I recognise that only one witnessed stalk makes it easier for more people to be tested. But I suppose what I am trying to tease out is whether it would be any easier to actually pass the new test and qualify.

If you commit a faux pas on any stalk you would fail whether in the old or new system?

Alan

 

[David Barker]

It is important to understand that while you can now reach the required standard after only one successful stalk. If for any reason that stalk dose not go to plan. EG a deer is not shot. Then a follow up assessment is required and you do not need to do it all again just the section that was not completed.

 

[8x57]

I do feel sorry for those that put in the effort and usually at great expense to gain DSC2 under the present system, they must feel more than a little cheated. While we always have to accept that times move on, at least they can say they did it the hard way.
It's pretty much the same with a lot of professional qualifications these days, I've experienced it myself. Johny come lately attaining the same qualifications after a much reduced courses and a simplified (dumbed down) "examinations".

 

[terrier1]

@Stalker1962 and @terrier1 ... do you recall if there was anything unique from your subsequent two stalks that could not have been ascertained by an assessor’s questions?

And I suppose the full corollary is...what unique experiences and circumstances have you had stalking which were not witnessed or ascertained in your 3 witnessed stalks. And do they then make the original 3x scheme invalid?

I recognise that only one witnessed stalk makes it easier for more people to be tested. But I suppose what I am trying to tease out is whether it would be any easier to actually pass the new test and qualify.

If you commit a faux pas on any stalk you would fail whether in the old or new system?

Alan

Well as you will probably be aware if you are an experienced stalker it is a lot easier to find the lymph nodes in a red deers head than in a muntjacs head.
On my very first level 2 assessment shot a roe buck which ran off shot site assessment showed pink frothy blood good blood trail into wood deer tracked and found by me Perfect hart lung shot.
Second level 2 stalk red deer spiker. Last level 2 muntjac buck evening stalk shot at last light shown aw all lymph nodes with head torch. As said before three different aw and three different deer species enjoyed all of the experience. I got good feedback from all three aw which gave me confidence going forward.

 

[willie_gunn]

Just to pose another thought - personally I think there is a strong argument that DSC2 was, if anything, easier under the old method.

Sure, you did three stalks, but previously the questions were primarily handled by the AW with whom the Candidate was doing their Witnessed stalk. There was often a relationship between AW and Candidate that had been built up over several outings. Yes, as a Candidate you still got a call from the Assessor, but I would say that was largely a formality because of the work done on the stalks themselves. The Assessor was really checking that the Witnessed Stalks had been completed successfully and that the Candidate therefore had a degree of understanding.

Under the new regime, all the questions are asked dispassionately by the Assessor. The questions cover all criteria in the ICR, and there is more interrogation of the "Yes, but would you do if....." variety. I see this as more of a thorough test of knowledge and understanding, and with the Candidate now in the unenviable position of having no idea about what questions the Assessor might ask, to which level of detail, and in what sequence.

A lot of the criticisms now seem to be driven from the perception of AW's and those who took DSC2 "in the good old days". Perhaps we might do well to consider instead what the changes mean from the Candidate's perspective?

 

[Stalker62]

@Stalker1962 and @terrier1 ... do you recall if there was anything unique from your subsequent two stalks that could not have been ascertained by an assessor’s questions?

And therein lies the rub.

Assessed on the assessor's questions. All terribly hypothetical.

"What would you do if...(insert drama here) happened?"

For me, three (there were plenty more trust me) witnessed stalks with a man (it was a man so calm down equal ops.) who knew his stuff and was not giving me an inch.
Fair play to him - he did not devalue the experience for me.

One of my witnessed stalks, the deer lifted it's head after my shot whilst I was walking in. I dealt with the follow-up appropriately and properly - he saw me do so. He was not constrained by my hypothetical actions.

Difficult to quantify unique - but I felt that with a professional (for that is what he was) witnessing me on three (plus) stalks, he could say with certainty what I was capable of and I felt I had undergone a "real word" examination on several species of deer in a variety of locations, weathers and circumstances.

I do not universally slate, verbal or hypothetical aspects to any examination - my final NHS examination was a viva voce - but that came on top of years of practical and theoretical examinations.

I do not damn the new system. I am just glad that I took the old.

 

[Tikkat3xl]

Do you think this will mean that less people will do the DSC1 and instead go for the NGO’s wild game meat hygiene courses which will still give you trained hunter status and allow you sell to the game dealer without having to do all the extra work of the DSC1?

 

[terrier1]

Sure, you did three stalks, but previously the questions were primarily handled by the AW with whom the Candidate was doing their Witnessed stalk. There was often a relationship between AW and Candidate that had been built up over several outings.

My first level 2 stalk Aw never stalk with him till that day.
Second level 2 stalk never stalk with him either. Third level 2 stalk was with a very well known and very knowledgeable AW Who I had stalk with for a good few years and who had been a very good mentor to me and had told me to get my level 1 .
And after taking it got a lot of stalking done and when applied for level 2.
I always intended to do one of my level 2 stalks with this gentleman as he had been such a good mentor to and learnt me the right way. I have been stalking with some guides on payed stalks who have done things that I knew was not right. They probably thought I didn't know and they could get away with it. I only stalk with them the once.

 

[Alantoo]

I note DMQ latest statement and anology with a driving test.

Well my driving test was many moons ago, I was observed negotiating junctions traffic's lights etc on numerous occasions over a short drive of perhaps 1/2 hour. DMQ are correct in that I did 1x test, but apart from the emergency stop I was assessed on multiple occasions at different junctions.

Sorry, an old thread resurrection.....

Analogies are always a problem! Too prone to subjective interpretation.

However in this context I would draw the parallel between being tested on a number of different issues...dealing with the anal tract, identifying the lymph nodes...turning to the right at a junction, entering and leaving a roundabout...and the repeated demonstration of the same knowledge..

Your driving test did not require you to drive around the same test route three times and be assessed on the same junctions three times, just the once?

Alan

 

[jim_allen_uk]

Do you think this will mean that less people will do the DSC1 and instead go for the NGO’s wild game meat hygiene courses which will still give you trained hunter status and allow you sell to the game dealer without having to do all the extra work of the DSC1?

Yes. I know two people that wanted to do the level 1 to gain the trained hunter. Both will now not be doing level one and instead are looking into the NGOs course.